Question :- Boiler + radiators efficeny ....

Question :- Boiler + radiators efficeny ....

this may sound like a odd question ,but you D.I.Y'ers seem to know your stuff , basically with gas going up in price , i've decided in rooms with 2 radiators , to have only 1 of them turned on and the other one turned off , seems to take longer for the room to get warm etc , but i'm happy enough.

But my question is , will my heating costs drop ? will a combi boiler use as much gas for say only half the radiators been used at any one time? as it would , if all radiators where been used?

my house is a standard type 3 bed semi brick built , i have 9 radiators in total.

am i making a 35-45 % saving ?

Reply to
Dave T
Loading thread data ...

Not likely, if you are heating the room to the same temperature as before.

If you are happy with a lower room temperature, then achieving that with two radiators and a lower thermostat setting should cost less. With only one radiator, you are likely to have to run the primary circuit hotter and longer - which is less efficient. You are more likely to have parts of the room far hotter than they need and others far colder. Which is less efficient.

If you have lots of radiators, most of the energy that you are paying for will be useful heat. The less radiators you have, the greater the percentage of energy that will be wasted rather than doing useful work. Ultimately, with no radiators, all of your gas bill will be for waste heat...

Turning off radiators in rooms that you want heated is generally counterproductive. If you want to save money, turn the thermostat down. Every degree higher you set that costs proportionately more. It costs a lot more to raise the room temperature from 25 to 26 degrees than from

17 to 18 degrees. Even better, have individual room, area or radiator thermostats so that you don't heat any area to a higher temperature than it has to be. eg a bedroom need not be at the same temperature as a bathroom.

I'm afraid that your economy measure in turning off radiators in rooms that you want to heat is actually going to increase your heating bills, not cut them..

Reply to
Palindrome

Yes but it's a totally pointless operation!

No you are completely missing the point about how a heating system works The best analogy for your question would be: Is it cheaper to fill my bath if I turn the hot tap half way or fully on?

Reply to
EricP

Unlikely. Personally I would look at heat losses. If you haven't got 10 inches of loft insulation (which can be DIY) and cavity wall insulation, and it is possible to have this work done, these would probably give you the

35-45 % savings that you are looking for.
Reply to
DIY

Hi , thank you all for your feedback , i was hoping , but it appears not , that using only 1 out of 2 radiators in each room i would be using e.g 50% less gas , a bit like only having 1 bar on the electric fire instead of

2....

so your opinions point me towards , having all the rads on , but at a lower temp , great advice .

thank you.

Reply to
Dave T

If you can make this work then bills will no longer be a problem to you. You will have discovered a way of creating more output energy for less input energy. The Holy Grail. People will be beating a path to your (exceedingly warm) door to throw money at you.

Mel W.

Reply to
Astral Voyager

I have a slightly different slant on the OP question.... I have 4 rooms I never use and have turned the radiators off, am I like the original poster kidding myself about cost savings? The system has 15 radiators.

Reply to
S

In general, if those rooms are at a significantly lower temperature than otherwise would be the case, then yes, you are saving on heating costs.

There are, of course, exceptions:

If one of the rooms has the controlling thermostat in it, then no, you will quite possibly be paying more as the temperature of the heated part of the house isn't really under proper control.

If one or more of the rooms gets so cold and damp that damage to contents or the building results - then it could be a false economy.

If the room has plumbing, in it or passing it, eg a hand basin, and that freezes and bursts - then it could be a false economy.

So, in some cases, it may be better to have the radiators in those rooms on a little.. In which case, thermostatic radiator valves may be worth fitting.

Reply to
Palindrome

Thanks for the explanation,

Reply to
S

Can you find any reason for not fitting TRVs?

Adam

Reply to
ARWadworth

A few. The cost, for a start - particularly if you have to pay someone to fit them.

IME, they tend to seize if set to a low temperature and so are "off" for many, many months (years?) at a time.

Also, IME, they can be difficult to get the right setting when used in a room that is only needs a little heating. It needs a lot of trial and error to get it right.

So the end result isn't significantly better than using conventional valves and relying on the house/zone thermostat to control the heating overall.

YMMV.

Reply to
Palindrome

Just keep an eye out for where damp may be causing problems.. Every time the door is open, warm air will enter and water vapour within it will tend to condense out. Also the water in the steam iron will go /somewhere/. Moving the furniture, now and again, to look at the walls behind might not go amiss. Any damp spots are better found earlier than later.

Reply to
Palindrome

This is a DIY group:)

They can do that. Mine never have done though.

As much trial and error as a conventional rad valve?

The big advantage is that you can turn a radiator off or set it to frost setting in seconds. TRVs are also compulsory to meet part L of the building regs (when part L applies of course).

Adam

Reply to
ARWadworth

HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.